The full content of Annals is available to subscribers

I see near-identical objectives and conclusions in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group's article [1] and writings of J.M. Brush, but the former did not cite the latter. Were Brush's studies not conducted in a different era, he could have coauthored the current paper.

His studies were done at a time when there were two conflicting schools of thought about management of diabetes: one chemical, championed by the Joslin School, and one clinical, followed by Tolstoi and his group. Brush occupied center stage more than 50 years ago with his intensive therapy for residual insulin secretion in patients with newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes. Without C-peptides and by relying on the much-maligned urine glucose testing, he arrived at the same conclusion as did the DCCT group. Both demonstrated that intensive therapy for type 1 diabetes helps to sustain endogenous insulin secretion.